McCain, Obama Spar Over the Other's Iraq Policy

By Zachary A. Goldfarb
In dueling appearances on the Sunday talk shows, Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama attacked the other's foreign policy and refused to reconsider publicly their earlier positions.

McCain reiterated his view that Obama's policy of favoring a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq within two years puts politics before prudent policy.

"Senator Obama doesn't understand. He doesn't understand what's at stake here, and he chose to take a political path that would have helped him get the nomination of his party," McCain said on ABC's "This Week."

Referring to his call last year to increase the number of troops in Iraq, McCain said, "I took a path that I knew was unpopular because I knew we had to win in Iraq. And we are winning in Iraq. And if we'd have done what Senator Obama wanted done, it would have been chaos, genocide, increased Iranian influence, perhaps al-Qaeda establishing a base again."

Obama acknowledged that violence has diminished in Iraq since the troop buildup began -- "more than any of us anticipated," including McCain and President Bush. But he added that it is impossible to know whether that country would be in better shape today if the United States had followed his call to start removing troops.

On NBC's "Meet the Press," Obama said McCain has failed to ask whether it was a smart decision to go into Iraq in the first place and whether a timeline for withdrawal encourages Iraqi factions to cooperate politically.

"John McCain's essential focus has been on the tactical issue of sending more troops. ... He's made his entire approach to foreign policy rest on his support of Bush's decision to send more troops in," Obama said.

Obama reiterated his belief that Afghanistan is the center of the war against terrorists. He called for the United States to send more troops there, and he said the Bush administration needs to be more aggressive in pushing Pakistan to go after terrorist camps.

Asked about the fact that a large percentage of Pakistanis apparently sympathize with the terrorists, Obama said, "If we are reaching out to the Pakistanis, and working with them not only about our security interests but also the well-being of the Pakistani people, ... that will gain more support for our policies in the region and in Pakistan and hopefully give more political space to act forcefully."

McCain was pressed about his controversial comment last week that Obama would prefer to lose a war in order to win a campaign. McCain did not back away from the statement, though he said, "I'm not questioning his patriotism."

"I am saying that he made the decision [to support a rapid withdrawal from Iraq], which was political, in order to help him get the nomination of his party," McCain said.

McCain was criticized for his remarks by a prominent antiwar Republican, Sen. Chuck Hagel (Neb.).

"I think John is treading on some very thin ground here when he impugns motives, and when we start to get into, 'You're less patriotic than me,' " Hagel said.

Hagel and Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.),who traveled with Obama to Iraq and Afghanistan as part of a congressional delegation, appeared on CBS "Face the Nation."

Reed, who sits on the Senate Armed Forces Committee, agreed that Iraq has seen a "demonstrable reduction in violence. And one of the facts that contributed to that was the increase of our forces. ... That's a good thing."

Host Bob Schieffer asked Reed why Obama couldn't make so declarative a statement about the success of the troop buildup.

"I don't think his answer is much different than mine. He recognizes these political factors. I think he also recognizes that recently, particularly the prime minister, [Nouri al] Maliki, has taken some very decisive action on his own," Reed said.

Hagel sought to quell rumors that he might be an attractive vice presidential candidate for Obama, saying, "I'm not interested. ... No one has talked to me about it. I fully expect that Barack Obama will choose someone in his own party."

Obama responded to criticism of his stop in the Middle East, where he spent much more time with Israeli officials than with Palestinians.

"I don't think that's entirely fair. ... The first time that I went, I did meet with Palestinian businessmen. I did talk to Palestinian students in Ramallah. When you're in a region for a day, you've got a lot of boxes that you've got to check," he said. "The Palestinian people are having a tough time right now economically. ... It is in U.S. interests to make sure that they have a sense of hope and opportunity and a Palestinian state. ... It's an Israeli interest as well ... as long as we also have certainty that Israel's security is not being compromised."

Asked about poll numbers showing that voters consider McCain to be the less risky presidential choice, Obama said those were unsurprising.

"I don't look like previous commanders in chief," he said. "It's not surprising people would be more familiar with him."

On ABC, McCain was asked about two polarizing social issues -- gay adoption and affirmative action.

McCain said he supports a referendum in Arizona that seeks to end affirmative action.

"I do not believe in quotas. But I have not seen the details of some of these proposals. But I've always opposed quotas," McCain said.

He also dodged a question about whether he supports allowing gay parents to adopt children.

"My position is, it's not the reason why I'm running for president of the United States, and I think that two-parent families are best for America," he said. "I am for the values and principles that two-parent families represent, and I also do point out that many of these decisions are made by the states, as we all know. "

NBC newsman Tom Brokaw tried to get Obama to spill a few beans about his tightly guarded vice presidential search.

Obama offered little, apart from saying that any candidate would put Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), his vanquished Democratic primary contender, on such a short list. He said he wants an active vice president who would challenge him and also offer a knowledge base in a particular field.

On the same subject, McCain allowed only, "I want to be the best team that we can provide the United States of America in very difficult times."

Comments

With only 143 days in the senate, Obama has a very thin resume and is unqualified to "Spar' with John McCain. Having him for president would be like getting on a plane with a pilot that never flew before.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 27, 2008 6:14 PM

I am currently in Europe where many see Obama with trepeditation because of his lack of experience. And don't be fooled by those pictures you see in the newspaper with throngs of young people around him. Two of Europe's most popular bands were playing. That is why they were there. They could have cared less about Obama--as this Democrat does.

Posted by: Political Watchdog | July 27, 2008 6:17 PM

What was shocking was Obama's answer to the question as to why Germany was only in the north.

His answer shows his lack of judgment, context and governing. He made a comment of Merkels reason was due to public opinion inn Germany that does not want Germany fighting. Obama indicated that she did not agree and was Obama's new best friend.

That was one of the most inappropriate comments.

He manner is condescending and apparently that is who he is. Not a vote getter.

Posted by: JohnAdams1 | July 27, 2008 6:21 PM

Obama has just completed a deftly executed visit to the hot spots of the world. War zones and heads of state are visited with ease and grace. Information is gathered and connections are made with generals and kings. At the same time, McCain and his staff are spending their time pouring over the micro-details of Obama's trip looking for the tiniest slip-up to complain about. They can't find much, but complain anyway. How do these two events deserve equal coverage in the news? I wish the press would stop being afraid of the Rove-style attack machine's claims of bias toward Obama and just report what's real news.

Posted by: Don | July 27, 2008 6:22 PM

Zach! Egads, man! Are you new to the Post? Do you want to keep your job? Pull this story immediately! There's nothing in it that denigrates McCain or glorifies Obama. Act quickly before the heresy is reported!

Posted by: guido28 | July 27, 2008 6:25 PM

As opposed to having a pilot who cannot keep a plane in the air?

Posted by: jb | July 27, 2008 6:26 PM

McCain should invite Obama to debate -- a real debate, for the first time in his life, probably, so we can see if Obama can think on his feet. My guess, he can't. He is incapable of admitting a mistake. How different is it for Obama to say: "I made a mistake in not supporting the surge," as it was supposed to be important for Senator Clinton to say: she'd made a mistake in giving Bush war powers authority?
That's all we heard from Obama. Trying to jam her "mistake" up her nose. Republicans, moderates, Independents should fully understand that this man and his wife, also, DO NOT MAKE MISTAKES. There was an "error" in this or that ... but he cannot now admit, the surge worked. I wasn't necessarily in favor of it either, but I think my past military and historical background led me to say: it will be a strong injection of forces into a situation totally spinning out of control.
If I were McCain, I'd also ask Obama: how many men and women were being killed in every month for a year prior to the surge? I mean Americans, British, etc? And how many Iraqis were being killed each month for a year prior to the surge? And what has happened in each case to those statistics? There are undoubtedly more, such as dead bodies in the streets, tortured. Or, wounded Coalition and Iraqi military as well as civilians. How many Iraqis could go shopping before the surge? Etc.
Then let Obama sand on his ... "well, there's no clear evidence that would have happened without the surge." It is, of course, literally, true. But the overwhelming evidence is that the surge radically brought down those dire casualties. In the absence of the surge, Obama -- not McCain -- Obama should be forced to show how else those dramatic decreases in deaths, maimings, shuttered stores, etc., would have turned around.
And, that Obama is about to take one of the greatest risks in our military history: regardless of any evidence that might suggest some tempering of previously held ideas ... slowly withdraw. Because if he said it was a mistake .. a horrific strategic mistake to even go into Iraq ... what would he suggest it would be to RETURN to Iraq, if the country fragments and the oil rich areas in the Kurd and Shi'a areas, align with Tehran? And, Tehran and Iraqi Shi'a areas become allies, and drive the price of oil to catastrophic levels? Does he propose it will suddenly become MORE STRATEGIC, if our oil supplies are badly interdicted?
Does he really believe if he commits two more brigades to Afghanistan, and the fighting worsens, that he will stop there, at that deployment level? Does he believe that our entire strategic balance could be altered if he goes ahead and bombs al-Qaeda or Taliban targets in Pakistan? Does he believe he can fight THREE wars with Islam simultaneously, and take Americans BACK to Iraq in the midst of that? What happens if the Gulf is heavily interdicted? What happens if the Straits of Hormuz are blocked?
Where does he think he can find a safe base from which to reinvade Iraq, if things go awry?
Obama is THE RISKIEST bet to have come down the pike in a long time, folks. He is naive, incapable of making mistakes, incapable of admitting mistakes, and has a wife who is equally arrogant and will surely carry her own form of Ultra Liberal Elite values into the White House. Or does the name suddenly change?
He of course, has 300 foreign policy advisors. Folks, he's already made up his mind on the surge as inconclusive and he's already made up his mind to attack Pakistan and also, to send more troops into the true bottomless pit -- Afghanistan. Obama is doing what the Russians did, by saying he'll fight "to win" in Afghanistan. But not in Iraq.
If people really want to see chaos ... vote for this clown.
He's a disaster in the making, and he is very much more risky than John McCain. That ought to suggest he'll be a terrible President. Already locked into mind sets before the nomination, much less, the election.
Obama - Emperor Of The World.

Posted by: zenhead | July 27, 2008 6:27 PM

Nice quick response by the Republican spambots. Anyway, Obama benefited heavily from the shift in Iraq this week. McCain was left trying to agree to timetables, sort of, on his Sunday interview. Not good.

Posted by: John M. | July 27, 2008 6:29 PM

My mind was made up a long time ago, and is not going to change...

The Republicans had a long run, and they broke almost everything they touched... its time for them to go back to the minority party for a while and let someone who actually cares about governing this country take over for a while.

Posted by: OldUncleTom | July 27, 2008 6:34 PM

John M, don't think I am a GOP shambot. I am a Democrat but Obama is not the candidate. You see the press coverage but I am in Europe talking to important people and people on the street. The headlines here say: Obama, another JFK or another Jimmy Carter. By the way, JFK wasn't a great president now that history has weighed in. Most of the world would rather have Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Political Watchdog | July 27, 2008 6:40 PM

As a former Naval Aviator that served when McCain was still on duty I am amazed at how he puts his military career forward as a qualification to be president. McCain graduated in the bottom 1% of his class at Annapolis.

While on duty with the Navy he managed to crashed four aircraft and get himself shot down. One air accident may be bad luck, even two, but four ?

Many officers that knew McCain personally would not comment on the record. I never heard any negative comments about his POW experience. I did hear comments concerning his competence as a pilot. Also there was some controversy concerning his actions in regards to the Forrestal incident.

In general McCains military career does not point to a shoe in for commander and chief.

Posted by: Dave | July 27, 2008 6:46 PM

How many years does a political party get to prove it's the right one, 4? 8? 12?.

Considering it only took 4 to destroy
my faith, I'd say it's been one too many for the Republicans. Now I'm a middle of the road voter who's veering to the left.

Posted by: CourseCorrection | July 27, 2008 6:46 PM

Don't be so fast to count them out. Bill and Hillary are waiting in the wings for something big to happen. If they could produce evidence showing that Obama was born in Kenya, he would be immediately disqualified.

Posted by: Garland1 | July 27, 2008 6:47 PM

John McCain seems to think he is running for the job of Commander of the Coalition Forces in Iraq. He is totally focused on Iraq, delighting in saying "I know how to win wars." That is a great military perspective, but overlooks the fact that a President has to know how to keep us out of unnecessary wars. And the job of the President (Commander-in-Chief) is to look at the broader picture of American interests at home and abroad. By focusing on an indefinite continuation of our presence in Iraq, he ignores the many other pressing needs of this country. He is willing to spend $10 to $12 billion per month for years when we need to make so many investments here at home.

And, if he really "knows how to win wars," then why did he not support General John M. Shalikashvili's call for more troops prior to the invasion? Why did he state that the war would be over quickly? Was McCain's agreeing with the Bush invasion plans prior to the invasion mere political expediency? And what in the world was he thinking when he said in 2003 that we may "muddle through in Afghanistan?"

McCain now seems to admit - long after Obama made the point - that we need to refocus on Afghanistan. But McCain's judgment is not up to being Commander-in-Chief. While he is an American hero, he is not up to being an American President.

Posted by: BlunderBush | July 27, 2008 6:50 PM

McCain is a fraud. He is not a flip-flopper, he is a revolving door, he spins so much. He would be a disaster as president. He knows nothing and apparently cares to know nothing. The decrease in violence in Iraq qould have happened surge or not. And many Americans lost their lives after the surge-it was not a miracle. Funny how all the cons who love bush because he stuck to his guns, now belittle Obama because he sticks to his. What, only republicans can be seen as resolute. Resolute in their phoniness, maybe.

Posted by: mike l | July 27, 2008 6:51 PM

To Political Watchdog:

Your posts are so transparently bogus. I challenge you to identify the "important people" with whom you have spoken. And please cite your evidence to support your assertion that "most of the world would rather have Hillary Clinton." In fact the media have been flooded with interviews with officials from several of the countries visited by Senator Obama, and they couldn't be more enthusiastic. Talk is cheap on the web. I say, with as much respect as I can muster for such an obvious bloviator: Put up or shut up.

Posted by: Preston | July 27, 2008 6:51 PM

OldUncleTom Said:
My mind was made up a long time ago, and is not going to change...

The Republicans had a long run, and they broke almost everything they touched...

----

Of course the Dems were in charge for most of the last 60 years--but don't think about that, it might hurt.

Posted by: Ellen | July 27, 2008 6:51 PM

Obama is correct in saying that we don't know what would have occurred had we not implemented the surge. He also didn't know whether Iraq had WMD when he opposed the invasion. Why vote for somebody who doesn't know?

Posted by: rpatoh | July 27, 2008 6:51 PM

OldUncleTom Said:
My mind was made up a long time ago, and is not going to change...

The Republicans had a long run, and they broke almost everything they touched...

----

Of course the Dems were in charge for most of the last 60 years--but don't think about that, it might hurt.

Posted by: Ellen | July 27, 2008 6:52 PM

Here's a question for all of you McCain supporters. If your chosen one is so much more knowledgeable about foreign affairs, how come he failed to predict the divisiveness of the tribes in Iraq? Why doesn't he get asked about his vote to go to war there? Even Bush's daddy knew the trouble of toppling Saddam.

So I don't give a rats arse that the surge worked, I am angry with the idiots who voted for the war in the first place. McCain is one of them.

Any kid with a history book could've predicted the outcome there.

Posted by: Judgement | July 27, 2008 6:54 PM

More of the Same McCain

Posted by: jato | July 27, 2008 7:00 PM

I totally agree. I voted for Clinton and despite the economic prosperity during the 90's, decided to vote for Bush due to the Monica scandal. Man, what a huge mistake on my part. Bush and the Republican Congress nearly destroyed this country. Nothing about McCain makes me believe his tenure as President would be any different. This country needs change and world leadership; I'll be voting for Obama.

Posted by: Goneyard | July 27, 2008 7:02 PM

Just to clarify Obama's war position...

Blunty, he believes it's the wrong war, not one we should be fighting, not one we should have started- that is why he advocates withdrawal. His belief that pouring resources into Iraq weakens our position to fight real terrorist centers, making sure our military is not over-stretched and work on redirecting some of the "war" money back into america's various infrastructures and needs.

This is the prime difference between McCain and Mr. O.

McCain thinks it's a valid war/occupation and Obama does not (preemptively removing saddam to place in a democratic "puppet" government).

Though since then some foreign terrorist have moved in, neither Mr. O or Mr. M want new terrorist bases set up in the country and both have vowed to continue fighting terrorist networks that might preside in Iraq and elsewhere now and in the future. Both candidates vow to fight terrorists.

McCain wants an American presence in Iraq into the foreseeable future, he wants our bases there filled for the purpose of a middle eastern stronghold which to operate out of and also protection for oil companies. He wants to be there also to help insure Iraq does not fall backward into further chaos, easily seeing Korea as a rough model.

Obama takes the tack of believing that it is Iraq's responsibility to run and secure there own country, manage competing tribes and sects, if possible, but does not want our troops to be in the center of a civil war whether that was happening in the past or something that will explode again in the future. That is what most Iraqis in and out of government want to do, run the show themselves, diminish American influence.

Posted by: Yar | July 27, 2008 7:02 PM

Dear Ellen,

You may be a very nice person, but you are truly ignorant.

"the Dems were in charge for most of the last 60 years"

Here are the facts: from 1948 through 2008, the Democrats have had the Presidency for 24 years (Truman 4, Kennedy-Johnson 8, Carter 4, Clinton 8) and the Republicans for 36 (Eisenhower 8, Nixon-Ford 8, Reagan 8, Bush I 4, Bush II 8). But please don't let facts interfere with your garbled version of history - it might hurt.

Posted by: Preston | July 27, 2008 7:02 PM

"Having [Obama} for president would be like getting on a plane with a pilot that never flew before."

Whereas having John McCain for president would be like getting on a plane with a pilot who's been shot down in flames -- literally.

Posted by: Peter Principle | July 27, 2008 7:08 PM

Like Bush, McCain represents an ineffective past. This country needs change and world leadership. This country needs a President Obama.

Posted by: goneyard22 | July 27, 2008 7:09 PM

Lacarids:
Who would want to have McCain for a pilot? He was involved in five downed aircraft!

JB:
If I were Obama, I'd ask McCain this question: How many Americans have lost their lives or been wounded as a result of particpating in an unnecessary war? Oh, wait. We know that already - thousands!

Ellen
Considering that 75% of the national debt was created by three republican presidents in the last few decades, how bad were things in the 60 years leading up to that?

Am I'm still waiting for an answer on whether being born in Panama qualifies someone as born in the USA. Maybe it IS one of the 57 states...

Posted by: David | July 27, 2008 7:10 PM

Of course the Dems were in charge for most of the last 60 years--but don't think about that, it might hurt.

Posted by: Ellen | July 27, 2008 6:52 PM

better check your facts we had republicans in charge for the majority of that time

Posted by: richard | July 27, 2008 7:11 PM

Heck McCain can't even answer the questions when he is asked. Talking points, bla, bla, bla. The GOP always talks about American Values. McCain says that about gay adoption. If by values he means dumping his wife to marry a trophy wife, you can keep them.

Posted by: Mike Y | July 27, 2008 7:15 PM

Let's remember that McCain crashed his plane, and he didn't use note cards back then to remember what to say.

Posted by: Neil | July 27, 2008 7:15 PM

No one has the right to question McCain's patriotism. After all he did spend 5 years in a prisoner of war camp some 40 plus years ago and McCain is fond of telling us how patriotic he is.

However, after watching the 72 year old McCain these last several weeks I have to wonder. His comments during his campaign appearances; his comments on Sunday talk shows; and the content of his campaign ads can certainly lead one to question his sanity.

McCain does not show the mental competence to be able to lead this country for the next four years. McCain's doctors need to come clean on his mental abilities.

Posted by: No McCain | July 27, 2008 7:15 PM

I don't know how many of you were able to see Senator Obama on Meet the Press this morning with Tom Brokaw. I did. Despite the fact that he must have been exhausted from his amazing odyssey over the preceding week, he was masterful and charming. The breadth and depth of his knowledge, his conceptualization of the totality of the issues confronting this nation and mankind, and his willingness to respond directly to Mr. Brokaw's questions, almost brought tears to my eyes, particularly when contrasted with the incuriosity and ignorance with which we have been plagued over the past 8 years. It is clear to me that anybody who thinks that John McCain should be the next President is either a racist or irredemably ignorant. Mark my words, good readers. Within the next four years, it will be unequivocally clear that John McCain is too impaired to serve as President. I beg you all to do the right thing for the good of the country and our world.

Posted by: Preston | July 27, 2008 7:22 PM

McCain's campaign has turned into a stuttering grumpy beak-pointing parrot.

"The surge, the surge, surgy-surgy-surrrrr, by the way Obama sucks."

He come across as shallow, mean-spirited and without much else to say.

Whether or not, people fall for it is another matter, we'll see. (blame the short-sightedness of the public)

But just as a matter of performance, It's awful campaigning.

Posted by: Yar | July 27, 2008 7:24 PM

McCain is trying out his act as the second coming of Joe McCarthy. Anyone who disagrees with his infatuation with staying interminably in Iraq to keep imperial hands on the oil is alleged to be "unpatriotic" and "an appeaser" and "a surrender defeatist". How much longer to we have to put up with his malarkey and balderdash?

Posted by: almaden | July 27, 2008 7:24 PM

Maybe we can give old man McCain a rifle with ammo, a walker and a seeing eye dog and send him over to Iraq in a mini-surge. It might refresh his failing memory on what combat on the ground is all about.

Posted by: Old Viet Nam Grunt | July 27, 2008 7:25 PM

Preston: I agree with most of what you said. Here's hoping the voters in November understand what is best for our country and elect Senator Obama. To elect McCain would just give us 12 straight years of failed presidencies.

Posted by: Obama in 08 | July 27, 2008 7:30 PM

The hulking inflexibility of McCain recalls why the Spanish Armada lost to the light, agile and modern ships of the English. His defensive reactions are appropriate to a second banana role in a B movie, but are unworthy of his record, which has included some highly principled and independent positions and votes. Although I don't support McCain, I like him and hope he will show more of himself during the rest of the campaign.

Posted by: FrankM | July 27, 2008 7:31 PM

McCain is so confused and senile about what is going on in his own campaign, not having a message or theme to run, and the man continues to show his lack of understanding of foregin policy by again today flubbing on his stance as well as his stance on affirmative action! It seems Mccain can't remember his stance on an issue one day ago - let along a year.

I would love a debate between McCain and Obama. The world will really see at that time the stark contrast between a man who's age is getting the best of him, a man who consistently contradicts his position depending on his audience. The man can barely talk! Sounds just like Bush to me! McCain's latest rounds of attacks and ads reeks of desperation and fear. Like Pelosi said, the dems pulled his chestnuts out of the fire and it's going to be up to the dems again to put McCain out of his own misery.

Posted by: Kimberly | July 27, 2008 7:33 PM

McSame has not one clue about the economy, he considers the American people as WHINERS!

Posted by: Jim | July 27, 2008 7:40 PM

Real president's don't have three, disgusting, muslim names and a wife who looks like Flip Wilson in drag.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 27, 2008 7:42 PM

Is it possible for Obama supporters to dispute the issues with their idol's opponents rather than resorting to sexism, ageism, and other negative stereotypes?

We all understand that racism and religious bigotry are forbidden in reference to your candidate.

In return, a little maturity and common decency on the part of Obama supporters would be appreciated.

Obama's already promised to negotiate with Iran unconditionally if elected US President. So far Obama hasn't disavowed that promise to the world, not that there aren't precedents aplenty of Obama disavowing promises.

Posted by: DaTourist | July 27, 2008 7:50 PM

I'm curious to know if Obama's puffing more than his usual quota of Kools here lately.

Obama was so "fatigued" when he got back from Europe. Smoking will make a young man of 47 fatigued before his time, and Obama can't seem to quit.

Posted by: DaTourist | July 27, 2008 7:54 PM

Yea okay 'Political Watchdog' im sure you are in 'Europe' talking to people on the street. Ive been living between London and Paris for 8 years now and never seen anything like the enthusiasm here for Obama...nobody was there to see any rock bands in Berlin either, thats a complete lie. The posters/banners/political fliers were quite clear about what the event was for, i should know because i was there. go back to spamming because you ARE a republican robot. just because they dont pay you doesnt mean you arent! and please try to make up some more convincing stories next time, you are flooding the world with ignorance.

Posted by: RealAmerican | July 27, 2008 7:56 PM

Is it the duty of the Secret Service to protect Obama when he smokes in secret, to supply him with Kools, and to pick up his butts?

That seems just a bit much to ask of the Secret Service.

Posted by: DaTourist | July 27, 2008 7:56 PM

But, Obama is not racist nor a religious bigot, The same goes for McCain.

but a comment like

"Real president's don't have three, disgusting, muslim names and a wife who looks like Flip Wilson in drag."

is both.

Racism exists out in our flawed world,

The candidates are not running on, created, vowed, threatening to put forth policies that discriminate on race or religious/non-religious beliefs. Get real.

You want maturity, look in the mirror and grow up.

Posted by: BeanSoup | July 27, 2008 7:57 PM

That the Hillary supporters are STILL bitter about Obama getting the nomination when SHE was the one who lost it in the 1st place. Common sense will tell you she "mis-judged" an effort ot really get out there and campaign to win the presidency, and not the nomination. ANd how they sit here and try to continually paint this picture of what a lack luster candidate he is...well looks like another "Mis" from that old and stagnant political game that Washington has grown so used to..."Mis-takes, mis-spoke, mrs. Clinton..." Poor thing that you have you folks trying to sell McCain as a better choice! We do NOT need another 4 yrs, let alone 8, of this poorly managed administration in office!

Posted by: Alarmed... | July 27, 2008 7:57 PM

McCain is preaching to the choir. The Republicans can only hope to hold on to their base and maybe pull a couple of fast ones with the ballot boxes. They've shown that they have a talent for manipulating presidential electoral votes. They've been working at it since the Reagan days, not to mention Trickie Dick.

Regarding Obama's lack of experience; I invite you all to spend a few minutes looking at the political and administrative experience of just a few of our past greats and not so greats that the Republicans like to wave under our noses. For greats, look at the experience of Lincoln and FDR when they came to the White House. Then take a peek at Ronnie Reagan and George W.

While you're at it, take a look at the backgrounds of Obama and McCain. You'll find it quite interesting, if you look into true biographies.

Posted by: ctmont | July 27, 2008 7:58 PM

Hey idiot, WE ARE IN TALKS WITH IRAN NOW! that has nothing to do with obama. George bush has sent the 3rd highest ranking officer at the state department to take place in direct talks!! you are the worst kind of idiot, one that makes his party and his brain look bad simultaneously. Im a republican and i want to win this year so please stop posting anywhere!!

Posted by: DaTouristsMom | July 27, 2008 8:01 PM

As opposed to a pilot who's already crashed five previous planes. Heh.

Posted by: Marcus | July 27, 2008 8:05 PM

Zenhead: **". . . so we can see if Obama can think on his feet. My guess, he can't. He is incapable of admitting a mistake. How different is it for Obama to say: "I made a mistake in not supporting the surge,"**

Everybody on the right has a single mantra: "the surge, the surge!" as though it has singlehandedly created some magical result--even though McCain got the timeline completely backwards for the surge and "Anbar awakening," which is heavily involved in the lessening of violence. Remember, too, that the surge was designed for a purpose--to allow political reconciliation. But has that occurred? And as informed observers note, one big reason for the lessening of violence is because Bagdhad has been largely "ethnically cleansed" of Sunnis, leaving the Shiites with less to "do." If you want to read real information about the nature of the surge, get it from people who specialize in mid-eastern affairs, like Juan Cole:

"What makes John McCain a war HERO? Didn't he get shot down and taken prisoner? Does that make him a HERO?"

Posted by: Anonymous | July 27, 2008 8:14 PM

Dear Preston: That was the Presidency. How about the Congress? You know the legislative branch? And perhaps the preceding terms of FDR and Truman don't help your position. And the last two years of a Democratic Congress don't seem rather spectacular, either.

Posted by: Frank Lee | July 27, 2008 8:16 PM

@ Political Watchdog: Name the bands, name your sources for this and try to convince me as I am one of those 200,000 there.

That lie of people were gathering in Berlin because of a free concert is so ridiculous alas still around. Repeating a lie does not make it the truth, it's just poor policy.

Oh, btw expertise in policies that McCain-Tent is proud to have it - at least pretending:

Having Tucker B. speaking of "fawning Germans" he is proving the excellent foreign affairs capabilities of that campaign.

Hope the bratwurst in Ohio weren't too bad...

Posted by: PPersol | July 27, 2008 8:16 PM

I was watching CSPAN the other day and the GAO reasoned that the "surge" worked because there was a "surge" in Iraqi trained forces from 250,000 to 500,000.

That's a pretty dramatic "surge" in my book.

The lessening of violence can also be tied to more Baathists (Saddam's former party) getting jobs in the Iraqi Central Government.

Geez, why didn't we think of that sooner? ...or was it our true intention to prolong the war as long as possible? Hmmmmmm....

Posted by: Anonymous | July 27, 2008 8:17 PM

White Americans continue to grapple with their legacy of slavery, lynching, Jim Crow laws, voter disenfranchisement, poll taxes, segegation, Klan terror, and hatred toward African Americans. Many white Americans burn with hate not only for Barack Obama, but for anyone who is not white.

White Americans pretend that their wellspring of hate for Obama is not a result of their own inherent racism and bigotry, with many whites willing to vote for a clearly inferior candidate in the old republican dim-wit, John McCain, rather than support anyone who is not white.

Barack Obama is swimming against a tide of racism and bigotry in America. The same people who voted to make the last two elections close enough to allow the republicans to steal them, are making up lies and doing everything they can to support the hapless old republican carpetbagger, John McCain.

Obama should continue to use the rope-a-dope on McCain, and provide the coattails for democrats to administer an across the board arse whipping to the republican party in November.

Posted by: DCSage | July 27, 2008 8:18 PM

How many planes has Obama piloted onto the deck of a rolling carrier or over Hanoi, missiles coming up? McCain Hero. Obama- Zero.

However, he did manage to get pretty "high" on a regular basis.

Posted by: Obama the Kid | July 27, 2008 8:20 PM

You read all these classless comments about John McCain by the Democrats here and you wonder how people can be so nasty. Then you remember seeing auditoriums full of Democrats cheering Bill Clinton AFTER they knew he molested and groped young women under his authority - not to mention probably raping Juanita B. and you understand. The bottom line is that as long as a president promises to do his or her best to protect their most important right, killing their young, they don't much care what else they do.

Obama can't pull us together and neither can anyone else. We don't want to come together. And that's a good thing as far as I'm concerned. Democrats have no connection to the characteristics of the people that brought us prosperity. Phil Gramm pegged them perfectly: whiners.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 8:30 PM

To say that the "surge" is completely responsible for the current state of affairs in Iraq assumes all else is equal, which it is not. Hence, the argument is phony and simplistic. For McCain to require Obama to prostrate himself over it is simple-minded, arrogant, stubborn, and silly.

"I am saying that he made the decision [to support a rapid withdrawal from Iraq], which was political, in order to help him get the nomination of his party," McCain said.

Again, wrong. He made no comment regarding "rapid withdrawal" and McCain knows it, so that makes him a liar.

McCain's idiotic comment about visiting the troops in Germany is more lying, because he knows the facts.

McCain has proven himself to be a terrible candidate, and has convinced me that he doesn't deserve my vote. I hope those who kept voting Bush into office reconsider their motives for doing so and their next vote.

Posted by: michael4 | July 27, 2008 8:34 PM

I would like to know what the U.S. is trying to win in Iraq? U.S. and coalition troops are being attacked by guerilla warriors, insurgents. The "war", was over in 2003, five years ago. Wars are fought between two "opposing" forces, not a large, occupying force and a small force that just irritates the larger force. Can we say Russia and Afghanistan? Even the Prime Minister of Iraq has finally come around to say U.S. and coalition troops should be withdrawn by the end of 2010. What victory, what surrender is John McCain talking about? He seems to be stuck in Vietnam, looking for a victory for his imprisonment.

Posted by: CitizenAJ | July 27, 2008 8:36 PM

You read all these classless comments about John McCain by the Democrats here and you wonder how people can be so nasty. Then you remember seeing auditoriums full of Democrats cheering Bill Clinton AFTER they knew he molested and groped young women under his authority - not to mention probably raping Juanita B. and you understand. The bottom line is that as long as a president promises to do his or her best to protect their most important right, killing their young, they don't much care what else they do.

Obama can't pull us together and neither can anyone else. We don't want to come together. And that's a good thing as far as I'm concerned. Democrats have no connection to the characteristics of the people that brought us prosperity. Phil Gramm pegged them perfectly: whiners.

It is amazing to read all the posts from the Rush Limbaugh/Party operative army, desperately trying to make people believe Obama is not a great leader, at the same time that Obama proves day-in and day-out that he is a superior leader.

Posted by: kevin | July 27, 2008 8:39 PM

Oh, my god, I am German and I am young, and I can assure you that there is a kind of enthusiasm for Barack Obama here in my country and all over Europe that I've never seen for any other politician.

On the other hand, there is, of course, the (neo)conservative, neoliberal and right-wing media as well as the politicians of Mrs. Merkel's party (who supported Mr. Bush's going to war, but fortunately was not in power back then),

but that doesn't change the fact that Barack Obama is seen, by the huge majority of Germans and Europeans, as the best that could ever happen to the United States and to the whole world.

He is the worst nightmare of the status quo, and of course, that status quo (i.e. the powerful and privileged few that are behind it) is fighting back hard. But I know the American people are intelligent enought to make the right choice.

Posted by: Sascha | July 27, 2008 8:43 PM

How many planes has Obama piloted onto the deck of a rolling carrier or over Hanoi, missiles coming up? McCain Hero. Obama- Zero.

apparently it's too hard for the Post to admit that McCain is a completely clueless airhead blowhard self-absorbed egomaniacal idiot. And those are his good points. Look. He did the same trip as Obama a few months ago. He's chaffed because he didn't get the press coverage for it. Now he's trying to blame Obama for being too pro-Israeli in his trip: last week, Obama was too pro-Hamas. McCain is a tired old jerk without a clue, but with a big PR branch. And that's all he is.

Posted by: tom | July 27, 2008 8:49 PM

Great news, Sascha! The Germans have gotten excited about a mesmeric leader who vows to unite the world beneath his inspired leadership. I thought that rally looked eerily familiar for some reason.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 8:50 PM

I don't know who in the McCain media camp needed to rip into 200,000 (mostly young) Berliners and visitors there as a bunch of "fawning" Germans ... just curious, don't Americans already have enough trouble internationally after 2 terms by Bush? Name one aspect of America that today is better after 8 yrs of Bush Jr. presidency, based on name-calling and fear-mongering? Germans of all ages are quite used to insults by others & recent history unfortunately does make us an "easy" target. But does McCain & Co. help anyone or anything in the US by insulting foreigners, by calling others names? I very much doubt it ... it just makes America look weak and petty.

Posted by: 200,000 fawning Berliners | July 27, 2008 8:50 PM

"Just say "Nobama"

Just say "Novocain"

Posted by: tom | July 27, 2008 8:51 PM

Political watchdog---you are a big liar spokesman for Dudfus McCain. This is the same crap we have heard about Obama every time he packs them in--that it's all about the rock group, not Obama. Geez, is that why they were about ten deep along the edge of the crowd where he was walking trying to touch his hand. I didn't hear any rock music when he was there getting ready to speak.

Posted by: majorteddy | July 27, 2008 8:52 PM

Hey, zenhead, better watch what you asked for. The Republicans kept badgering Obama until he went to visit Iraq and Afghanistan. Now that he did and pulled a few stops in Europe they are green with envy at the reception that Obama got wherever he went. Maybe they should have just shut their mouth and left well enough alone. Then Maliki agrees with him on the timetables and even Bush agreed Obama was right. McDufus.

Posted by: majorteddy | July 27, 2008 8:56 PM

200,000 fawning Berliners, does "recent history" refer to starting two world wars and putting millions of people to death in concentration camps? That's one way of putting it, I guess. For some of us, a bit more time needs to pass before we entertain the moral opinions of Germans with much regard.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 8:56 PM

The Republicans are just steamed because they keep going overseas and getting spit on and heckled. It was heartwarming to see them cheer an American leader for a change.

Posted by: majorteddy | July 27, 2008 8:59 PM

And as far as "weak and petty", it's the courage and blood of Americans that kept Western Europe from first being enslaved by the Nazis and then by the Soviet Union. That wall came down because Ronald Reagan had the courage to confront the Soviet Union with the threat of force - not through any united effort with the Europeans, who universally condemned him as a "cowboy" too.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 9:01 PM

###########

SAY NO MCWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

##########

Posted by: nomcway | July 27, 2008 9:03 PM

Obama understands our predicament much more than McCain who believes we're in two wars, Iraq and Afghanistan. McCain's belief is like saying WW II was two wars because we fought in Asia and Europe. We're in one war against terrorists. Obama recognized the Iraq theater as a mistake, and no amount of parsing by McCain and other neocons can overcome the fact the entire theater was based on lies and misinformation.

The Iraq campaign is on par with Napoleon and Hitler's march into Russia. Like the French and German troops, our troops are overextended when our real enemies are in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We cannot redeploy our troops to Afghanistan because they are bogged down in Iraq. The tragedy of Iraq is that many people fighting us today supported our war against al-Quida. Iraq was a secular society with mixed neighborhoods and families. They knew the power of religious fanatics whom we have inadvertently helped establish in Iraq. The only al-Quida camp in Iraq before 2003 was far up in the mountains near Iran and Turkey. Obama knows we should redeploy our troops to Afghanistan before al-Quida and the Taliban launch a more sustained and effective offensive. They are tenacious. They beat the Russians and al-Quida offers a more serious challenge to peace than Iraq ever did. Questioning McCain's support for the tactical mistake of Iraq is what patriots should do, and what Obama is doing.
The Iraqi campaign may be the worst strategic blunder in American history, and we should leave as soon as possible. Iraq was a campaign built on pretense, on WMDs and a link between Saddam and al-Qaida. Nothing dishonors our fallen soldiers more than to continue a foolish theater of war. Iraqi has hobbled the military and sullied our reputation with many allies who supported our war against al-Qaida in Afghanistan. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned of the toll Iraq could take on the military. A military report released by the Pentagon, Joint Forces Command showed no connection Saddam Hussein's Iraq and al-Qaeda. Al-Qaida won't survive in Iraq. Lt. General Odom, former NSA director, said the Sunnis will destroy al-Qaida, the Kurds will not allow them and the Shiites detest them. Why stay? The Iraq fiasco has become our Somme and akin to Hitler and Napoleon's ill fated marches into Russia. America has not experienced a horrendous loss of life like the Somme or Russia, but our military is as thoroughly bogged down when our real enemies are in Afghanistan and the mountains of Pakistan. That's where our soldiers should be. Obama understands where our real enemies are, McCain's does not.

Posted by: Keith | July 27, 2008 9:03 PM

Dear Perplexed. Can't myself (as you can) to time-travel back to both world wars to find out who really started everything ... and who is really guilty and who is innocent (the US of course) ... but I can't recall ever reading anywhere or in any language that someone went on trial in the US or was condemned for 2 atomic fire-storms that the US military ignited in the quiet of an August morning over two fine Japanese cities? Yes, I know, the atomic bombs were meant for German civilians, but our cities were already 95% rubble and the Wehrmacht surrendered too quickly... a sad day for you.

Posted by: Hiroshima & Nagasaki | July 27, 2008 9:06 PM

Look at these Europeans: When they needed someone to liberate or protect them, they couldn't have been more pleased for the United States to sacrifice millions of its young to deliver them. Now, when a thug like Sadaam is doing to his people EXACTLY what Hitler and Stalan tried to do, they think force is wrong. I suppose it's too much to ask for some gratitude, but at least you could have the good grace to be quiet while we save another people from a fate you begged to be delivered of in your time of need. England is the only country that has consistently stood against tyranny with more than words.

Posted by: guido28 | July 27, 2008 9:06 PM

##########

The Berlin wall came down because
the soviet economy was doomed from the
start. Too much money in too few hands
based on building up a military that cost
the people too much money; while the rest
of the world was modernizing the Soviets
were stuck in the past, much like the
republicons have taken the u.s. today.

We need to get away from the Reagan
spend, borrow and rip off the middle
class economic policies. From the Reagan
to Bush, jr administrations it has been all
deficit spending. The only time we
come out of deficits are when the Democrats
control the White House.

Hey republicons, check this out if you want
your head to explode, the stock market
does MUCH better during democratic
administrations.

It would be funny if it weren't so said
for the rest of us.

############

Posted by: NOMCWAY | July 27, 2008 9:09 PM

Hiroshima & Nagasaki, let's start with a trial for the officers at Nanking. But, actually, since the Japanese killed and tortured most of our soldiers that they took prisoner (remember the Bataan Death March) because they dishonored themselves by surrendering instead of dying in battle, by your own standards at the time, we would have leveled the island.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 9:11 PM

Obama opposed the surge in Iraq and now won't admit it worked despite all the evidence. Yet he wants to do a surge in Afghanistan, arguably a more intractable situation. Why does he think it will work there? We want to know so he doesn't commit a blunder.

Posted by: John | July 27, 2008 9:11 PM

zenhead:

You wrote a lot of words, a lengthy diatribe, but said nothing of substance to blast Obama.

Why don't you just shut up!

Posted by: McCain_08 | July 27, 2008 9:15 PM

NOMCWAY, The economy did great once the Congress was able to put into effect the Republican Contract with America that cut taxes, reduced the size of the federal government, encouraged entrepreneurship, moved people off welfare into confidence building jobs, and stimulated investment. Clinton didn't write it and he didn't sell it, but he did sign it. And he's still getting credit for the results.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 9:15 PM

My friends, the American public will fall for my plan and vote for me. Why? Because they're idiots. You're all idiots. We're a nation of idiots.

If you don't believe me, just look at my staff. I appointed them from all walks of the American spectrum. Why? To prove America is made up of idiots.

You're an idiot too.

Posted by: McCain_08 | July 27, 2008 9:19 PM

Surging left, surging right. Had Bush not concocted a lie (Saddam's A-bombs) & ordered his weak-kneed generals to invade Irak there would be no "surging" in the deserts of other countries. The UN committee could have continued to reign Saddam in and frustrate his monopoly on power. Slowly, but surely Saddam would have fallen.

Of course when you watch cowboy movies all your life (in English) you want the non-English speaking Indians dead in a hurry - this really helps a lot & leaves Indian families benefiting from a happy fatherless home. Blasting your way into every country that has a dictator or a non-democratic government is going to keep Republicans, like McCain, pretty occupied.

However, not everyone in the US is convinced that guns & gore is the right answer to neighbors who don't speak English or go to a Christian church. Personally, I prefer atheists who prefer Gandhi and Jesus and peaceful approaches to life and struggle rather than crazies of the gun-totting KKK.

Posted by: surging right along now... | July 27, 2008 9:25 PM

surging right along now. Know a lot of athiests that prefer Jesus, do you? By "reigned in" do you mean that his torture and murder was confined only to the Shia and the Kurds? Enlighten us: where was even the start of an internal revolution that had any credible chance at toppling Sadaam? Not to mention his two psychopathic sons who were ready for a seamless transfer of power that would have ensured the suffering for another generation.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 9:30 PM

surging right along now, By UN Committee I suppose you mean the Security Council. Google "Oil for Food Scandal" and you'll understand why the French were happy with things as they were.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 9:37 PM

But don't you worry, my European blog-mates, our history-is-dead, europhile Democrats will probably soon be in power. Then we'll sign any agreement you wish, conduct ourselves in any way that wins your praise, and generally try to emulate your great success. Soon we'll have those powerhouse economies and standards of living that you enjoy. Then you'll pat the Obamas and Pelosis on the head and they will grin happily at pleasing their heros.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 9:42 PM

don't know a "lot" of atheists who like jesus, no. doensn't matter, I dont believe in heaven either. strange? about the bad guys in Irak, like Saddam & chemical Ali & his murderous sons... there are people like this in every society. What do you know about torture rooms in Russia, in China, in Serbia when no one has a camera rolling? you can't simply start blasting your way into every living room that doesn't speak English or when you hear loud arguments from the neighbors. if Bush is so righteous and worried about good eveywhere, why doesn't he provide 50 million Americans with universal health care. instead he wastes 1 trillion good US$ on a 7 yr war which no US high school student understands.

may I presume you do, mr.perplexed? what will be the conclusion of this sad war? what will be achieved after the bombing & killing stops? will anyone there or in the US be happier about losing loved-ones? who will cheer after the last (young) US trooper in khaki uniform departs?

like all wars - and the US has never felt one on its own territory other than the civil war 150 yrs ago - like all wars, they achieve nothing absolutely nothing that could not have been achieved peacefully without anyone dying. Bush himself dodged the Vietnam war. he intuitively knew, even in this alcoholic days, that dying was for others...

Posted by: hadeze | July 27, 2008 9:45 PM

hadeze. I know that the former Soviet satellites are free today because of American direct confrontation. I know the Soviets weren't able to occupy Western Europe because Americans thwarted them again with military strength. I know that it was the United States that opened relations with China that has led to a gradual (too gradual) improvement in their treatment of their own citizens. I know the South Koreans and a successful free society because of our military intervention.

And I know that five years from now, the Iraqis will be a free nation with a prosperous economy and a democratic government. That will be because of George Bush. I also know that no Democrat when this happens will acknowledge that when things got difficult, their solution was to abandon the Iraqis to their fate and withdraw.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 9:54 PM

I also know, by the way, that the problems in the Middle East started when England and France took advantage of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire to intervene in the area in order to obtain control over oil. The majority of the internal conflicts in Iraq stem from the inept way those two countries established countries. At least England does something to try to fix a situation they were responsible for in the first place.

France is different. Here's a country that left a mess with us in Vietnam and in the Middle East. Their specialty is starting something based on their self-interest, then transferring the problem to America, then waiting a couple years before starting to criticize the way we deal with a problem they ran away from.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 10:01 PM

By the way, I understand France is very popular now in the Middle East. I guess former colonists responsible for 100 years of bloodshed get a pass if they are willing to criticize the United States. Speaking for a lot of people here, take them as allies if you wish. Here's hoping they perform better as allies for you than they ever did for us. After Googling "Oil for Food Scandal", try "Vichy France". That should give you some idea of French fortitude in the face of danger.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 10:06 PM

Hey! I know! Let's all beat up on France! It makes GW look less like a moron, if that is possible; and gives all the cutsie posters a chance to show off for their beaux! What a FABULOUS! idea! The RNC is providing dollars and kisses as we speak! WHEE!

Posted by: tom | July 27, 2008 10:17 PM

recall that the way to hell is paved with good intentions... about saving Eastern Europe... one recalls that the Reich's territory, east of the Oder, Poland, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Hungary, the Czechs, the Slovaks, the Romanians, Bulgarians and all unnamed other nations and nationalities not mentioned were raped or exterminated by Stalin, your friend, after Truman said "peace" had come (to the Victors). Peace meant prison and death to all those behind the Oder River... minor detail.

You neatly forget that without German & Communistic armies cutting themselves to pieces for 4 solid years (1941-1945) the Americans troops could not have landed in Normandy without excruciating pain. Would the US have lived with millions of dead soldiers? Ironical, but without the losses Hitler imposed on his hated atheistic enemy Stalin US losses would not have been 250,000 -add some when faced with more than 5-10% of a war-weary German Wehrmacht.

You got Hitler & destroyed Germany (a great success?), but left over half of Europe in Stalin's frigid grip. You hardly ever commented on Gulags or Solschenitzyn's prisoners. After all, according to you, according to TIME magazine, everything was fine, just fine. Great, but was it really great? The suffering went on and on.

What will happen when the US leaves Irak? Who will win, who will lose? It's just not as simple as you envision it. There will be a price to pay, refugees, revenge... the end of war is never "kind" to anyone. Irak will not suddenly shine after the US is done with military exercises there.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 10:19 PM

Okay, you don't like France. How about Germany? Great Britain? Israel? Iraq? Afghanistan? Any more countries you want to denigrate because they're associated with Obama? How about the US? You're denigrating the US daily and hourly, with your pissant carping. Hope you know it!

Posted by: tom | July 27, 2008 10:22 PM

Beat up on the French? Could you please point out what I wrote that was factually incorrect? Otherwise, we can assume you are a typical europhile, which is another way of saying college-educated Democrat.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 10:22 PM

"the end of war is never "kind" to anyone. Irak will not suddenly shine after the US is done with military exercises there. "

Hard cheese. It also want cost me a few billion a year for invading a country we never should have invaded. You morons want to defend it, you pay for it! The beginning of war is even less kind. You did it!

AIN'T YOU PROUD?

Posted by: tom | July 27, 2008 10:24 PM

Hi perplexed. I seem to be disagreeing with myself. I suppose that means I win the exchange, one way or the other.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 10:25 PM

college-educated Democrat?

that's it Mr. Perlexed. You stay, I'm gone - that remark is too primitive for further discussion ... when you have to denigrate schooling & education. without knowledge we might as well grunt at each other and swing clubs.

Posted by: hadeze | July 27, 2008 10:28 PM

"

Look at these Europeans: When they needed someone to liberate or protect them, they couldn't have been more pleased for the United States to sacrifice millions of its young to deliver them. Now, when a thug like Sadaam is doing to his people EXACTLY what Hitler and Stalan tried to do, they think force is wrong. I suppose it's too much to ask for some gratitude, but at least you could have the good grace to be quiet while we save another people from a fate you begged to be delivered of in your time of need. England is the only country that has consistently stood against tyranny with more than words.

Posted by: guido28 | July 27, 2008 9:06 PM "

The ignorance of that post truly boggles the mind! I guess American education really is in crisis, if we are turning out people like guido28 who can type without thinking or knowing anything!

Posted by: tom | July 27, 2008 10:30 PM

A mixed bag of countries there, Tom, and no connection to Obama that I can see. I beleive Germany, England, and France have been covered. Israel is a wonderful ally - a staunch democracy that would be a great economic success story if they weren't fighting for their lives constantly. The Iraqis have never had an opportunity to live in freedom, but even under tyranny have had a culturally rich society for centuries. They too will be a success story within a short period of time. I know little about Afganistan beyond the news, so I can't comment on its people knowingly, but they have proven themselves to be loyal allies and very brave. We can hope that conditions improve for women, however.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 10:30 PM

"McCain should invite Obama to debate -- a real debate, for the first time in his life, probably,"

It WOULD be a first for McCain! Hope he doesn't forget to put his false teeth in!

Posted by: tom | July 27, 2008 10:31 PM

Well, Tom, I certainly couldn't pass any contemporary History class in a public school, so I suppose you're right about not being "educated". Did you have a specific point in that post you wanted to question? Which part is factually incorrect? The number of casualties from two world wars? The fact that the Europeans implored our assistance? The fact that they argued against our military intervention in Iraq? The fact that they started the whole mess in World War I? Choose any point you'd like to debate or suggest another one.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 10:35 PM

Actually, Tom, John McCain invited Obama to 10 town hall events. Open debates without moderators, just talking back and forth and taking questions from a mixed audience. Senator Obama has declined. John McCain takes reporters into a room and sits with them for hours taking any question they have. He finishes when they run out of questions. Senator Obama doesn't even hold frequent press conferences.

Posted by: perplexed | July 27, 2008 10:44 PM

Hmmm more interesting facts on where McCain stands. Interesting, yet I don't find some of this interesting as surprising, based on his previous actions on other issues.

I look forward to the debates between these two.

Posted by: Obama2008 | July 27, 2008 10:56 PM

A natural born citizen of the United States requires one to be born either under one or both of the following rules: jus soli (of the soil) or jus sanguine (of the blood). Both John McCain and Barrack Obama meet both of those requirements. McCain's parents were both citizens and he was born on a US air base (even though it was in a foreign country, the Supreme Court has ruled in other cases that US foreign bases, ships, etc. are considered jus soli or of the soil for citizenship. Barrach Obama was born in the US with one parent a citizen. Kindly check the dictionary for the definitions. Please no more challenges on the "natural born" citizenship requirement.

Posted by: JWP | July 28, 2008 12:40 AM

A natural born citizen of the United States requires one to be born either under one or both of the following rules: jus soli (of the soil) or jus sanguine (of the blood). Both John McCain and Barrack Obama meet both of those requirements. McCain's parents were both citizens and he was born on a US air base (even though it was in a foreign country, the Supreme Court has ruled in other cases that US foreign bases, ships, etc. are considered jus soli or of the soil for citizenship). Barrach Obama was born in the US with one parent a citizen. Kindly check the dictionary for the definitions. Please no more challenges on the "natural born" citizenship requirement.

Posted by: JWP | July 28, 2008 12:45 AM

Yes, just like here in Portland, Oregon, where 70,000 people came to Waterfront Park to see The Decembrists - 200,000 people came to the Tiergarten in Berlin to see some unidentified, but "extremely popular," bands.

If you believe that, I have a war with Iran I'd like to sell you... "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran...heh, heh, heh." Oh, yeah, gramps McCain is a heavyweight alright. He just needs to have a permanent ear mike to Joe Lieberman so he won't continue to make so many gaffes. He is looking very foolish these days.

Posted by: Chuck | July 28, 2008 12:59 AM

My brother fought in Vietnam; he was a pilot. His plane went down and we lost him when he returned to the States, the first time he flew after Vietnam.

For you idiots, insensitive, and I must say anti-American juvenile (it does not matter how old you are) to say things about McCain and his plane going down is ignorate, stupid, and tasteless especially to every American who has honorable died or been injured for his country, and for his loved ones. All of you who say these things are slamming every person who has ever worn the uniform of the U.S. military. You need to grow up; I'm ashamed that we have you as Americans.

Posted by: Jeanette Ervin | July 28, 2008 1:12 AM

It's funny how the right has tried to portray Obama as someone who can't speak off the cuff. McCain is the one who can't give a straight answer. How they figure McCain will appear the superior debater is laughable. Obama will simply eviscerate McCain. I predict a total embarassment.

Posted by: Bill | July 28, 2008 1:21 AM

McCain is unfit to be president. He's old and forgetful and get confused easily. He knows nothing about economics and he's running on his experience to run the war yet he doesn't know which countries border Iraq. Why people would even vote for him is a total mystery.

Posted by: Bill | July 28, 2008 1:26 AM

A withdrawl of US troops from Iraq within two years......

Is Maximus Barrackus Obamula Hitler NUTS????

Posted by: magdalen | July 28, 2008 2:28 AM

A US troops withdrawl from Iraq within two years.......

Is Maximus Barrackus Obamula Hitler NUTS????

Posted by: magdalen | July 28, 2008 2:35 AM

A US Troops withdrawl from Iraq within two years......

Is Maximus Barrackus Obamula Hitler NUTS???

Posted by: magdalen | July 28, 2008 2:46 AM

republicans to the perent's of American children " I will trade you this flag for your child." Any one who gets dooped into taking that deal has been used. This is because America hasn't been in a war worth fighting for in a vary long time, beware the draft.

Posted by: amber | July 28, 2008 2:49 AM

Why did you not publish my coments; too McCain for you bias sob. Your are a terible example of the "free press" supposely we have in American. Your reports have studied in the societ union and all you give us is your opinion, not the news.

Posted by: won't name my name | July 28, 2008 3:22 AM

IN RESPONSE POLITICALWATCHDOG COMMENT:

"And don't be fooled by those pictures you see in the newspaper with throngs of young people around him. Two of Europe's most popular bands were playing. That is why they were there. They could have cared less about Obama--as this Democrat does."

What are you talking about?!?! I attended Obama's Berlin lecture and I can gurantee you that the audience had no interest whatsoever in the bands that were there. I've never read such an idiotic comment in my entire life. Those bands weren't popular, they were just doing cover songs the entire time! The 200,000 people, who showed up 3-4 hours early, were there to see Obama, no one else. Obama rocked Berlin, get over it.

Posted by: Elliot | July 28, 2008 8:56 AM

My typo--not a 'lecture', his 'speech'.

Posted by: Elliot | July 28, 2008 8:57 AM

Drilling the earth!????now there's a stupid stupid idea!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Rumorsofwar | July 28, 2008 12:53 PM

"winning in Iraq" there's another stupid idea!!!????Is Mister McCain INSANE?????I really think he must be???Does the man not know that MURDER IS A SIN??????!!!TO MURDER MEANS TO BREAK ONE OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS?????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Look what that war has accompleshed for Americans making them lose family members and causing them economic hardship all because of gas. Look at all the Iraquis who've lost their lives and their children who've been traumatized and injured. BUT REALIZE THIS THING:::::::::Iraq does not belong to America and America does not belong to America because
THE ENTIRE EARTH IS THE PROPERTY OF THE ALMIGHTY GOD OF GODS AND KING OF KINGS WHO LIVES FOREVER AND EVER AMEN++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Posted by: Rumorsofwar | July 28, 2008 1:39 PM

MURDER IS A WORSE SIN THAN FORNICATION, HOMOSEXUALITY
ADULTERY, USING DRUGS and RACISM.

Posted by: Rumorsofwar | July 28, 2008 1:45 PM

AVOID COMMITTING A MORTAL SIN!!!!

VOTE FOR OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IT JUST MAY KEEP YOU FROM GOING TO HELL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Rumorsofwar | July 28, 2008 1:48 PM

Wow, bloggers here aren't the brightest bunch. lol.

Posted by: Will | July 29, 2008 9:56 AM

McCain....does not know what the price of bread is...

McCain....does not know hwta the price of oil is

McCain....does not know how to lie yet

McCain...has malignant growths removed from his head

McCain...has been in the senate for 23 years and has a poor attendance record

McCain...says he's for the troops but has voted against 9 measures...6 no vote...3 he did'nt even show up

McCain...just because you were in the military, your record shows that you don't really care for anyone in military service at all

McCain...get with the 21stcentury already!
Have Cindy spend some cash on your silly
self.... have her purchase a Bluetooth, A Blackberry and an Apple iPhone...and dont eat any of them or you'll get a bellyache or it will distort your face....

I don't know about John McCain. The man is just old and sick with cancer, there no way around it. I am sorry to say this, but this is sad fact. America had fool as a president for 8 years. We can't afford to have now old and sick president for 4 years. Just look at those photos http://caricature-now.blogspot.com

Senator Obama was a strong supporter of Jim Webbs' improved GI Bill. George W. Bush and his cohort in crime John Mc Cain both came out against the GI Bill which would give the troops a college education until the bill had overwhelming support and the threatened veto had no chance. I am a veteran and my son fought in Iraq and we are both proud to be part of the thousands of veterans for Barack Obama.

Senator Obama is an embodiment of the American dream and a uniter not a divider. He picked himself up from meager means to a Harvard Law degree and became editor of the Harvard Law Review the first black person to ever achieve the honor. He chose to serve as a community organizer rather than as a highly compensated corporate attorney. He served as an Illinois state legislator and then became a Senator from Illinois. He is today the Democratic party's nominee for President. To come so far is an incredible story and one that proves again the value of hard work and tenacity in the land of opportunity. Add in the fact that he is black and it is incredible how far we have all come and also how far we have to go.

His judgment on foreign affairs continues to shine through. He was right that we did not belong in Iraq and that our treasure and the lives of our troops are getting plundered for no good reason. He was right that Afghanistan was where our enemies should be battled. He was right that diplomacy needed to be a bigger part of our arsenal and has stated he would negotiate with our enemies but not bow to them. Today you can see the Republican Bush administration making exactly the moves Senator Obama has called for and then of course taking credit for the correct actions.

As a Cuban American I am happy to see Senator Obama willing to try a new strategy for relations to Cuba besides the failed embargo we have tried for fifty(50) years with no results. Why should we keep doing the same thing and expect a different outcome?

Our nation needs allies to confront the big issues that face our country we cannot go it alone and can no longer act as if we own the planet. Our allies all support OBAMA.

Please don't let John Mc Cains' campaign and its lies and negative propaganda cause you concern or make you believe it is too great a risk to back the candidate with the better intellect and integrity. Shout out YES WE CAN! PROUDLY and vote for Barack Obama. You wont regret putting our country on the right path.

Go here to learn what the MSM hides:
The Obama File http://theobamafile.com/
This massive file, written by a retired, widely respected college professor is the ultimate Obama sourse of accurate information.
The information is backed up by links to Obama's own books, speeches, news articles and matters of record.
It covers his history from his African ancestors to the present with daily updates under 'Latest News' button at the bottom of the page.
It is easy to read and research. ('search' box)
If the MSM would get out of the tank for Obama and report just half of this information he would be not only taken out of the presidential race but impeached from the Senate.

movies that have literary elements [URL=http://internicmovingservices.com/help/icons/thumbs/topic1633.htm]movies that have literary elements[/URL] [url=http://internicmovingservices.com/help/icons/thumbs/topic1633.htm]movies that have literary elements[/url] [url]http://internicmovingservices.com/help/icons/thumbs/topic1633.htm[/url]